InfoWorld's Savio Rodrigues sees 2010 as a watershed year for Ubuntu, one that could herald meaningful enterprise interest in the OS, thanks to a rising tide of developers - and deployment servers - adopting the OS. "As with many recent trends in the IT industry, developers become ambassadors for products they enjoy using and have quickly become an early indicator for enterprise technology usage in the future. In a seemingly perfect storm, Ubuntu is benefiting from strong developer usage, and the fact that developers are increasingly selecting Amazon's EC2 cloud platform bodes well for continued Ubuntu success on EC2," Rodrigues writes, noting that Ubuntu has surpassed Red Hat usage on deployment servers as well. "As that occurs, IT decision makers will need to consider or reconsider Ubuntu for usage within the enterprise. Rest assured that Red Hat won't sit idly by during these discussions."

You seem to get lost between "It uses a modified Linux kernel" and "Android is not a Linux product". A Linux product is a product built on Linux technology. Android is. It really is just that simple. (Maybe you meant it's not a Gnu/Linux product? We'd agree there - Android has a custom user land built on Java technology. ;-)

Speaking of remarkable leaps, the thread was:

"[q][q]Besides that, an adoption of Linux around 30% (in the mobile area) can hardly be considered a failure.

Where did you get 30% from?
"
Probably from Gartner.
[/q]
The context of my comments were about Linux on the desktop.
[/q]

Jumping from "30% in the mobile area" to "the context of my comments were about Linux on the desktop" is... well, remarkable. :-D

You seem to get lost between "It uses a modified Linux kernel" and "Android is not a Linux product". A Linux product is a product built on Linux technology.

Please... it's beginning to get old. Nobody cares about the difference between Linux and GNU/Linux; it is good for nothing aside from making excuses and showing off. Users only care about the userland (hence the name). Since Android doesn't use the Linux userland, it is not a "Linux OS", at least not in the same way as Meego is.

an adoption of Linux around 30% (in the mobile area) can hardly be considered a failure.

Yes, but as a brand, Linux is as marginal on phones as on the desktop. It would be great if Nokia and Meego could change that.

You say this as if there's a standard Linux userland. That's why I tried to help with specifying "gnu" - that's the most popular desktop userland (but by no means the only one).

But on mobile, the most popular is currently the one called "Android".

Other platforms have different, often radically different, userlands. It's a feature.

'...doesn't use the Linux userland, it is not a "Linux OS"'

That's possibly the most bizarre claim I've ever seen on OSNews. If you switch userlands, the kernel is magically different? Seriously?!?

Look, this is really very simple. A Linux product uses the Linux kernel. Linux is everywhere (don't look now), from phones to HDTVs to autos to routers to supercomputers. I have no idea why that worries you so; it's excellent code, hence its amazing success, and it's very open, hence... its amazing success.

Pretending that Android is powered by magic Google dust instead of Linux won't change that, but if it makes you feel better, then... *shrug*

You seem to get lost between "It uses a modified Linux kernel" and "Android is not a Linux product". A Linux product is a product built on Linux technology. Android is. It really is just that simple. (Maybe you meant it's not a Gnu/Linux product? We'd agree there - Android has a custom user land built on Java technology. ;-)

I'm not at all lost. Android is not a "Linux product". It's a Google product.

Calling it a Linux product is about as accurate as calling a plane that uses Mercedes jet engines a Mercedes product. It may use a component of what the general person considers Linux (i.e. the userland experience), that is a modified kernel but calling it a "Linux product" is simply misleading.